Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Lazyking, Oct 5, 2012.
Byfar, the most accurate.
Wow. Real nice list.
I think it's hard to rank quarterbacks from 1-32 myself. Maybe ranking them in tiers would be a better method but I digress.
1) Brady......Can't argue with success.
1A) Peyton Manning.....While still physically limited (IMO), he still has the smarts to play at a very high level.
1B) Eli Manning.......I think his best football could be in front of him.
2) Rodgers........Hasn't been able to play at the same level that he was at during his super bowl run but with a good showing this year could jump a notch.
2A) Brees......Saints are a wreck after bounty gate but I still think he is a good quarterback.
2B) Big Ben......Knucklehead both on and off the field at times but finds a way to make a play when the chips are down.
3) Matt Ryan......I think he has youth(27) on his side as well as some tools to work with.
3A) Romo.......Still needs to improve areas of his game.
3AA) Rivers..........He needs to figure it out as he isn't getting any younger.
3B) Schaub.........He's playing within the system and the Toxins are making the most of the oppurtunity.
3C) Vick........Hasn't been all that impressive of late so I could see him dropping down a notch.
Something else to consider is that there are going to be a couple of young guys in the next year or so knock a couple of those guys in that third tier down a notch. For example, Vick is likely to drop a notch and be replaced by Luck next year. Even Romo could possibly be outplayed by Luck, RGIII or Tannehill in the not so distant future as they have youth on their side.
Something to think about when ranking starting quarterbacks. Those guys that are at #9 or #10 on your list aren't all that far removed from #16 who is middle of the pack.
Remember, the knock on Romo is that if he had a better team, he'd advance further in the playoffs.
Guess what? Michael Vick had about as bad a team as Romo has had and got his team to the NFC Championship Game.
And a rusty Vick, albeit healthy, got the Eagles into the playoffs three years ago despite not being helped by Andy Reid.
Yes, I think Vick is a better quarterback than Romo. But like Romo, he takes it upon himself to do more than he should. Andy Reid has a stellar back in LeSean McCoy yet refuses to use him to balance out Vick and his propensity to take a hit and turn the ball over.
But, again, Vick has done more with less than Romo has and has taken his team to the brink of a Super Bowl.
Yes, because it's impossible to have different opinions and be a serious football fan.
and that's not considering some young guns like Flacco, Stafford and Newton who I would absolutely consider over Romo at this point in time.
I think Romo is a bit above those three. Flacco really hasn't done much with a stellar defense. Even a quarterback with monicum talent should take the Ravens further than Flacco has, though I think he came of age last year.
Stafford really hasn't done much yet, as far as I'm concerned. And Newton has all-world talent, but he's not a better quarterback than Romo, not at this point at least.
You people never cease to amaze me.
Flacco and Stafford isnt a crazy thought..but Newton? Not this year.
Actually it is. What has Flacco done to be put above Romo? Nothing. He took his team to an AFC Champioship Game, but would he have gotten there without a terrific defense, offensive line, and running game? Absolutely not.
Stafford has only played one playoff game and got destroyed in that game. He has done nothing to warrant being put over Romo.
That's your logic that Vick made it to the NFC Championship one time really? :laugh2:
What has he done since? Not a damn thing. He's only made the playoffs a few times since then. You said Flacco isn't better than Romo which is true even though he made it to a conference championship game. Then what exactly is your reasoning for using that same reasoning to you clearly didn't apply to Flacco to Vick? If you're gonna say Vick is better than Romo because he went to a conference championship game than how can you not do the same for Flacco was has actually made two conference championship games?
Bottom line though is Mike Vick has had one good season in the NFL. That one season isn't really better or even close to as good as any of Romo's seasons he's played. You can take Romo's worst season as a pro which is probably 2008 compare it to Vick's and who wins? Romo by a long shot. In their respective careers Romo has 154 touchdown passes compared to Vick's 117. Romo thrown two more picks. He has 80 while Vick has 78. Keep in mind though Tony has thrown the ball more so of course he's gonna have more picks. Tony on his career has 20 more pass attempts. Tony has a phenomenal completion percentage of about 65 while Vick has mediocre and that's being nice completion percentage of 56. Nearly a 10 point difference. Tony also has a QB rating of 96 while Vick only has a QB rating of 80. Tony blows Vick out of the water in every single category essentially.
In short absolutely no argument can be made that Michael Vick is a better quarterback than Tony Romo. Better athlete? Of course. Better quarterback? Hells to the no.
7. Matty Ice
Although I dont like Alex Smith his 8td to 1 INT ration is pretty darn impressive this year.
Not a bad list at least the first half of it. Still think putting Flacco, Ryan, or Schuab over Tony is ridiculous, but hey at least you didn't put Mike freaking Vick over him. That is just ridiculous right there. Always cracks me up when you say Raper lol.
Ive met the Raper a few times. Complete RichardHead. :laugh2:
Flacco is not better than Romo or Rivers
Really? What'd you say to him?
i'd rather not say... people freak out if you don't put Romo in the top 15.
Because he's easily a top 10 quarterback and anyone who says anything different shouldn't be taken seriously.
Vick and Cutler?
Don't agree with Rivers too.
Do you have him below 15?